West Virginia Democrat. [volume] (Charles Town, W. Va.) 1885-1890, 1887-10-14
THE TARIFF.


made most intelligensly and most
satisfactorily by reference to the
actual results OF manufacturing as
shown in the census reports OF 1880.
Although much Improvement in
manufacturing many things may
have been made since that time yet
the statistics then collected furnish
the most reliable data available by
which the question can be examin-
cd. Take the State of Pennsylvania
as an example, being one of the
great manufacturing States. The
statistics show that the total of her
manufactures amounted in the cen
Sus year in round numbers to $145,-
100000. The average duties col
lected on imported goods for that
year were 435 per cent. adj ralorum.
If, as the protectionist contends, all
goods are enhanced in value in the
hand of the manufacturer to the ex-
tent Of 49, per cent the advantage
to Pennsylvania in enhanced value
by reason of the tariff would amount
to 1924, 100000, or $324,O00.000 of
the total value of the $745,OOO00O
manufactured would be due to the
tariff.
1t is claimed by the advocates Of
tariff for protection that such tariff is
necessary to enable our manufac-
turers to compete with foreign low
priced labor. Let us see how the
account stands in that view of the
question. By the same census re-
port it is shown that the total
amount of wages paid in the pro-
duction of the 100000 of goods
in Pennsylvania was only Sl34, 000,-
900, while the enhanced value Of the
goods produced, by reason of the
tariff, as claimed by the protection
list, was $324,000,000, or nearly two
and half times as much as the to-
tai wages paid in production. If
it be true that our manufacturers
receive and advance on the price Of
their goods equal to the tariff duties
imposed on foreign goods of 4 like
kind then the above proposition
would be true. But such concession
proves too much. To accept that
proposition as time would prove that
the duties on foreign goods are great
~ in excess of the amount neces
sary to equalize the price of labor
between our country and the cheap
err labor of other manufacturing
countries. If it cost Pennsylvania
manufacturers only 1874, 10000 in
wages to produce $745,000,O00 woth
of goods then foreign labor at only
half the price paid here, as it is of
ten claimed TO be, would produce
the same amount of goods at cost
for wages of 100000 which
would be only little more than one
fifth OF the enhanced value Of Penn
sylvania's manufactures by reason
of the tariff. If the cost of labor in
Pennsylvania was only $67, 1000, 900
more to make 100000 of goods
than labor to do the same work
would cost abroad then ten per cent.
tariff duties would more than make
up for the difference between wages
in Pennsylvania and in European
manufacturing countries for ten per
cent. on $745,O00,000 would be $74,-
100000 while the difference in
wages was only $67, 100000 if wages
here double that of foreign wages.
This practical statement clearly
shows the fallacy Of the claim that
all goods made or commodities pro-
duced in our country are enhanced
in price or value in the hands of the
producers to the extent of the duty
imposed on foreign goods of like
kind The proposition is nearly
true with respect to many of the ar
tIcicS manufactured in our country,
and many other articles are affected
by the tariff in less degree. But
there is still another great class of
commodities manufactured and 9TH
erwiSc produced in our country
which are not affect at all, or are al
fected in an imperceptible degree.
The State of Pennsylvania illus
trateS the facts above stated in its
varied productions and notably IN
most of its manufacturers of leading
articles.
OF the total manufactures of
$745.000,000 in that State more than